South Africa 1885

[Industrial Helix]

So now all ports border each other and all ships? So why is each port connected to a ship?

A right... I forgot to delete the rules about the ships... It should now read that the ship wheels connect to only the ships.

[bigimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v302/Shone/SouthAfricaLARGE-16.png[/bigimg]

[natty dread]

But ships can only attack the ports they're connected to? IMO this kinda fights against the idea of ships... to me ships represent ways to travel over the sea... It would make sense to me if the ships could at least attack adjacent ships. Right now they're just isolated dead ends, not very shiplike...

[Industrial Helix]

Well, think of them less like war ships and more like supply ships. I'm trying to reference the various South African wars in the set up and what I'm running on is that the British needed to import their supplies whereas the Boers stockpiled and the Zulus made themselves. There weren't any real naval battles during these wars, so hence the lack of naval battle style territories. I mean, after all, merchant ships wouldn't exactly be attacking each other on the high seas.

[natty dread]

Yes, but even merchant ships should be able to access more ports than one. That they each only connect with one port kinda makes it feel like they just sit there anchored to the ports, never sailing to the sea...

[army of nobunaga]

Another Idea... I have not looked so I may be wrong. But isnt there islands off the coast all around there? throw an island or two in. Might make some of your port decisions easier.. I dunno.

I like this map in general, either port idea or extra ships will not change my opinion.

[army of nobunaga]

well i just looked, I was wrong... small little bitty islands and the one larger one i was thinking of is really far away.

[Industrial Helix]

well i just looked, I was wrong... small little bitty islands and the one larger one i was thinking of is really far away.

Madagascar?

[theBastard]

hm, I also think that ships sail the sea. so maybe they could attack each other and attack all ports. or only ship connected to port can attack it, and other ships can bombard it?

[Industrial Helix]

Well, like I said before, these aren't navy ships but rather supply ships which under most circumstances, do not attack each other. And I'm kind of opposed to having them attack each other because they're dead ends just like the forts. In fact... they're the exact same as the forts in function. They just use a different image to reflect how the British got their supplies throughout South Africa's wars.

[natty dread]

Ok, fair enough... if that's how you want to do it, I can live with it

[Industrial Helix]

Alright, I threw up a poll to get some ideas as to how people are feeling about this map at a glance. Nothing like a little anonymity to get a true feel for how this map is progressing. So please vote all of you and if you could, tell me why you voted as you did. Thanks!

[natty dread]

I voted for number four, because I still think it would be nice to have the ships do more than just act as swimming forts & dead ends. But on the other hand I understand your reasons for making them so and it's your map after all... As for the rest of the gameplay I think it's great, just the type of map I enjoy playing - not too open, but not too bottlenecked, not too complicated, but not exactly standard... it will be good for escalating games, and I love escalating games.

[ender516]

I voted 5, because I basically agree with natty, but have no problem at all with swimming forts and dead ends.

[theBastard]

I voted 4. I like it (as all your maps ), I only not exactly understand "double bonuses" by forts and ships. it means that if you hold one fort/ship it double all your bonuses, or only any peculiar, or you must hold all forts/ships to double bonuses?

[Industrial Helix]

Well, I was thinking that one ship/fort will double any bonus. If you hold the fort in Transvaal and control Zululand, then the Zululand bonus is doubled.

[theBastard]

Well, I was thinking that one ship/fort will double any bonus.

so not only bonus in which fort lies/ship is connected, but all bonuses? so if I hold Basutoland (without fort) and any fort also bonus for Basutoland is doubled?

[Industrial Helix]

Right. So it's like you gathered the army of Basutoland and launched a raid on Natal. you broke in, killed the Boers and stole the weapons in the fort.

The big difference is that you have to continue holding the fort, whereas in a raid you'd take the weapons and leave.

But yeah, essentially you've got it.

[ender516]

If it helps, think of the fort as having a gunsmith's shop and a munitions factory. As long as you hold it, you have a supply advantage.

[theBastard]

understand now. it is good idea, maybe forts/ships will be too important, but who have guns win

[Industrial Helix]

Well they certainly will be important and as you say, whoever has the guns wins. Another prospect is that the forts will be heavily guarded, even if a player don't take the fort itself. This echos real war in that you guard where you're guns are. This will be especially true if a player secures a bonus without taking the fort, heavy defense will go into the territory the fort sits on... presuming the player knows what he's doing.

@ender - you got it. through with the ships its more like the munitions and gunsmiths are in England, hence the port/ship relationship versus forts.

[ender516]

Right.

[Industrial Helix]

Alright, quick update. Evil Dimwit suggested I add some clarification to the map. If you hold two forts and a bonus, it does not triple the bonus. You should be able to see it down in the right corner now.

[bigimg]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v302/Shone/SouthAfricaLARGE-18.png[/bigimg]

Now the next thing I want to hash out is at what neutral should the forts/ships be?

My idea: I want the map to put a player in a situation where things have the potential to change rapidly against their favor. The doubling of bonuses would be that rapid change because by taking one territory a player has doubled their men. The situation echoes the British problem in South Africa during the variety of wars they fought. Everything seemed clam and cool and then boom, you're at war with the Zulus without any warning. Or it turns out the Boers have been buying and hiding weapons and all of a sudden rise up.

The important thing is that the forts are not really touched until that point in a game where players start settling in their bonuses. What neutral number would be ideal for this?

I'm inclined to say 4 or 5. But willing to hear arguments.

[natty dread]

I'd perhaps consider a slightly higher bonus. Can't really say why, it's just a gut feeling. 6 or 7.

[Industrial Helix]

What do you mean by higher bonus? Or do you mean up the neutral to 6 or 7?

[natty dread]

bonus neutral count.